Fallout new vegas was a good game and i enjoyed playing it
it had a vast selection of weapons mods and new items as well as crafting your own items and a nice follower wheel also weapon degrading was slower
i wish i could say it exceeded expectations but the sad truth is that it did not come near the vast majority of peoples expectations
lets talk about the bad things

First of i know it used the same engine and the landscape looks slightly different due to the location but other than that it feels like im playing an expansion for fallout 3(aside from jacobstown but the ground was still the same)

Second the main story line was so short that for each of the ways it could end it felt like a side mission there was to little emphasis on the NCR and Ceasers legion

Third the 3rd game was glitchy but this was crazy the weapons the pip boy and the vats sometime took 3 or 4 seconds to open or fire

Fourth in the thrid one there is no continue unless downloaded BoS expansion but it was not needed in here at all

Fifth andby far the worst abomination that could ever had been in the game is how much smaller the map is and all the restrictions you placed
mountains on all sides some places are restricted by some sort of invisable wall....what the heck man? i had to get the explorer perk just to find out that there isnt even anything out there to the entire west side of the map or the southeast

our one request
release a really sick expansion that patches the glitches expands the map continues the main story and for gods sake allow us to kill crap after we beat the story..this might sound like allot but i have faith in you

if there is anything else someone found wrong with the game please bring it out

No offence but you don't speak for me, and I don't see how you could speak for the "vast majority of peoples". Admittedly the game is very buggy and the engine has issues, but IMO Fallout New Vegas is the most authentic fallout game since Fallout 2 and is a great game overall. Far superior to Fallout 3 in almost every way.

Fallout 3 may have had a bigger map but it also had a lot more empty space with very few worthwhile population centres. Heck, the entire north, northwest and west segment of the capital wasteland could have been removed and very little will have been lost

Please, for the love of Marcus, never ever make this claim. Unless you personally interviewed every single person who plays FONV, you cannot make this claim. The truth is, the vast majority of people playing FONV never visit these forums AND it is human nature to complain but not give praise so you are dealing with a biased sample if you only count the people on these forums.

your right theyll probably add stuff but its a shame they didnt put knew enemies besides knew bugs WoW ,far as ive seen i just want them to fix the freezing and turning off of my ps3 WORD! besides that ill let you let them know the extras cuz 2 me the game is good but alot of stuff couldve been better .

I'm sorry but i could disagree with you more. fo3 blows this game away as far as game play. i'm quite disappointed with fo:nv thus far. all though i still spend hours on it. you cannot say this game is better though. you are the only person i've seen clam that.

I make this claim too. FO3 was a FPS with elements of RPG whereas FONV is an RPG with elements of FPS. It all depends on what you like. You obviously prefer the FPS to Roleplay whereas I prefer the roleplay and story to FPS even though I am also a big FPS fan hence why I have all of the Battlefield series, Call of Duty Series, Medal of Honor series...shall I go on?

Fair enough. It's just my personal opinion and I mainly posted in this thread because people who make sweeping generalizations (IE the OP) really tick me off. I felt the story and characters in FNV were much more convincing and thought out. I also love the moral grey areas which FO3 seems to lack. FO3 was a step away from the fallout franchise by making most decisions black and white. Either you are good or evil, which is just not realistic.

Most people (including me) think that FNV blows f3 away in nearly every aspect, the one thing that fallout 3 has over fnv, is that it is a bigger map, but a lot more empty.

You forgot to link to the article.

I found this game simply amazing.

I expected the engine to be the same, and for it to be reasonably buggy (more bugs then i hoped for). I mean, they did only take 2 years to make the game, and it is a HUGE game, considering there are 4(?) ways you can go about beating it.

The weapon mods add a lot into the gameplay I thought, you can make your weapon stronger, lighter, faster, and scope-y-er.

I thought the main quest line was a good length, the game took me about a week to beat, and thats only 1 way, and I barely did any side quests.

I'm hoping for some continued playing with DLC though.

If they do make another Fallout I am hoping for a completely gutted, or brand spanking new engine. Take 4, 5 years for all I care.

(I do wish you could make it so a disguise wasn't active.)

I dont understand why everyone seems to not like the landscapes in this game. IMO the map is so much better than FO3. Theres a lot more variety in the landscapes and visuals. Fallout 3's map was all the sae thing. the one thing that was different from the rest was Oasis.

But in NV, there are a lot more towns, the red canons, the yellowish desterts, then there are the darker duller drier lands, and towards the river, ex. Forlorne Hope, the fort, Hoover Dam, etc, things seem a little darker and griity. and dont forget about the north western part of the map, with the forests on the mountains and jacobstown.

I also think the fact the the story has an ending is fine. Theres no need to continue after that, just save before the last mission.

And also, yea the story may be a bit short, but there are so many ways to end it that it requires you to play more than once. and not to mention the 100+ side missions

the ONLY thing you mentioned that actually makes sense are the glitches. but Me personally, i havent run across anything major. My game has been running fine. FO NV > FO 3

http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1133354-which-do-you-think-is-better/

Fallout New Vegas is better than Fallout 3 in my opinion.

I think most of the posts have been positive. A new release has bugs; anyone who thought it wouldn't wasn't being realistic. I'm having a blast and I read a lot of posts by other people (the majority) who are having a blast. If it was mostly negative, I couldn't stay here and read it.

I don't speak for anyone but me; it's a personal opinion...and I don't particularly care what a reviewer says. I care what I think when I play it.

Funny, I've seen a large majority of people claim that. Including myself. It is all down to opinion, though.

He also can say that game is better. He did. As did I. Just now. It's all opinion. Fallout 3 has more in terms of exploration? Maybe. In my opinion New Vegas trumps it with everything else.

To be honest, no matter how verbose your claims are, you still look like a complainer. I knew it was going to go down this road the second I read the 'I love this game and all but..' disclaimer, because thats usually a fallback point when someone argues you.

That said, my expectations of Fallout: New Vegas were vastly exceeded. Then again, I never held it to high expectations, I find holding a game to have high detailed expectations causes more grumpiness and hate towards it than adoration.